Giuseppe Attardi Antonio Cisternino Polymorphism Giuseppe Attardi Antonio Cisternino

Generic programming Code reuse is clearly a good idea Often an algorithm can be applicable to many objects Goal is to avoid rewriting as much as possible Types introduce great benefits but also may limit code reuse: int sqr(int i, int j) { return i*j; } double sqr(double i, double j) {return i*j; } The notion of sqr is unique but we must define it twice because of types Languages offer mechanisms to address this problem

Polymorphism The ability of associate more than one meaning to a name in a program We have already seen two kinds of polymorphism: Subtype/inclusion (inheritance) Overloading Polymorphism is the fundamental mechanism for generic programming There are other kinds of polymorphism

Classification of Polymorphism Parametric Universal Inclusion Polymorphism Overloading Ad hoc Coercion

Universal vs. ad hoc polymorphism With overloading an implementation for each signature is required We provide ad hoc solutions for different objects Inheritance instead allows defining algorithms that operate on all classes of objects that inherit from a given class In this case a single (universal) solution applies to different objects

Containers Example: Java Vector Signature of addElement: Vector v = new Vector(); v.addElement("Pippo"); v.addElement(new Integer(2)); Signature of addElement: void addElement(Object x); The argument is of type Object because the container may contain any type of object

Problem with containers Inserting an object in a vector we loose type information In our example we implicitly upcast from String to Object: v.addElement("Pippo"); Extracting the second element with the wrong cast produces a runtime error: Integer i = (Integer)v.elementAt(0);

Weakest constraint programming Where do we assume something about objects that we manipulate? class Vector { Object[] v; int size; public Vector() { v = new Object[15]; size = 0; } public addElement(Object e) { if (size == v.length) { Object[] w = new Object[](2 * size); w.copy(v, 0, size); v = w; v[size++] = e; }} We assume only assignment operations and arrays: operation available on all objects

Can we sort our vector? How to add a method for sorting a vector? We do not have enough information on our objects: no comparison operation is available Our vector is too generic! Two solutions: accept only objects that implement an interface (i.e. IComparable) that exposes a method to compare objects public void addElement(IComparable e) {…} Pass a functional object: an object which implements an interface for comparing Object instances (i.e. IComparator) public void Sort(IComparator c) {…} interface IComparator { int compare(Object x, Object y); }

Abstract as much as possible! To express generic code with subtype polymorphism we should abstract the essence of the operations required on the objects we want to manipulate Risk is over-abstraction: once defined our vector we can’t easily add a sort method Another issue: inheritance relies on explicit annotation of our types and changes are hard to perform

Iterating over a collection A common programming pattern is to enumerate the elements of a collection It doesn’t really matter how the collection is organized We can implement a class per collection type whose objects enumerates the elements. Example: Enumeration elements() { return ???; } void printCollection(Enumeration e) { while (e = hasMoreElements()) { Object o = e.nextElement(); System.out.println(o); }} Interface

Question Which class implements method elements? Class Vector Use overloading and singleton class Enumeration { static Enumeration getEnumeration(Vector v){ return v.elements(); } // Other collections’ enumerators Thus we can add enumerators to existing collections

Enumerator for Vector class VectorEnum implements Enumeration { int idx; Vector v; bool hasMoreElements() { idx < v.size(); } Object nextElement() { return v.elementAt(idx++); } VectorEnum(Vector v) { idx = 0; this.v = v; // why it is not copied?

Is the enumerator up to date? To ensure that the enumerator is consistent the vector should be copied into the enumerator This isn’t reasonable: memory wasted and we iterate on a different vector! There is no way to ensure that the enumerator is consistent with the vector Nonetheless it is possible to do something: we introduce a “version” of the vector Each time the vector is modified the version is incremented The enumerator compares the version of the vector with the one of the vector when it has been created

Event handling in GUI Before Java 1.1 OO GUI frameworks were based on sub-typing GUI can be easily described using generic programming: buttons are a subtype of control which is a special window Containers of graphical widgets operates on controls, irrespective of their types Event dispatching and handling is dealt by virtual methods hence by default is delegated to the super-type

Java AWT Event Model class Component { int x, y; bool handleEvent(Event e); } class Button extends Component { String text; bool handleEvent(Event e) { } … class Window extends Component { … } class Frame extends Window { … }

Event handling class MyButton extends Button { boolean handleEvent(Event e) { switch (e.type) { case Event.MOUSE_UP: … return true; // Event handled! } default: return super.handleEvent(e); }}

Limits of AWT Event Model Generic programming in this case is quite elegant but inefficient Propagation of events to a number of handlers, mostly useless Proliferation of classes: one for each object with different behavior

Alternative Event Delegation model Observer Pattern (aka publish/subscribe) Observable has set of registered observers Observable notifies its observers when its state changes Handling performed by objects that provide a Listener interface (aka callback, delegate)

Java JDBC Java DataBase Connectivity is a specification from Sun for accessing databases in Java Interesting example of generic programming It implements a driver architecture exploiting the mechanisms of JVM

Overall architecture The java.sql package exposes only interfaces The only class is DriverManager Using the class constructor a driver register itself with the DriverManager The programmer performs the following steps: Load the database driver (a Java class) Create a connection to a database (using DriverManager) Obtain a Statement and execute the query Enumerate the rows using a ResultSet

JDBC example Class.forName("…"); // Load the driver Connection c = DriverManager.getConnection("…"); Statement s = c.createStatement(); ResultSet r = s.executeQuery("select …"); while (r.hasNext()) { // Value of second column as String String s = r.getString(2); }

Question Statement is Class or Interface? Connection, Statement are Interfaces Through the DriverManager the program obtains an object of unknown type which implements the Connection interface The same applies to all the other interfaces: through the connection an object implementing Statement is obtained, and so on and so forth